Hi,
Once again I didn't read it completely (maybe I will do so), but my 2ct:
I recently played with Ruby and Python and of course with their application
server (at least a little bit). My experience was, that it is less fun as
it sounds in the first place compared to a well designed
webserver-int
to Matijn Woudt: you are right there should be something like: public
void synchronized increment(), but that is not the point. Sure there
are disadvantages and other problems but what Alessando is saying is
"I would not use cure for cancer even if it existed because it can
introduce other problems
On 9/26/12 10:18, "Matijn Woudt" wrote:
>Writing scripts for an application server requires a much deeper
>understanding of threads and computer internals,so as a result it
>probably increases error rate.
Well... yes and no. PHP's architecture pretty much keeps you from having
to mess with thre
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Maciej Liżewski
wrote:
> in Java (for example) you just write class:
> class Counter {
> static private counter = 0;
>
> public void increment() {
> this.counter++;
> }
> }
>
And here's where things go wrong.. You assume ++ is an atomic
operation, but in
On 9/26/2012 11:23 AM, Maciej Liżewski wrote:
Well.. many things changed during last 30 years. Cobol is not
mainstream, we have got OOP, Java, Python, Ruby, Google and other
great things :)
I am talking about stateful application server. There are plenty
examples in other programming languages:
Well.. many things changed during last 30 years. Cobol is not
mainstream, we have got OOP, Java, Python, Ruby, Google and other
great things :)
I am talking about stateful application server. There are plenty
examples in other programming languages: Java has Jetty, Tomcat, Ruby
On Rails, Python an
6 matches
Mail list logo
